Quote:
Originally Posted by normstad
You don't seem to understand that the FEDERAL district can be much smaller than it is now. The remainder can then be a State, no constitutional amendment required.
|
yes the federal district could be much smaller, but that still would not make for the remaining part of a CITY to be declared its own state
then you are not even considering the issues of what makes up the METRO part of said city:
a) while dc is about 700k people, the metro areas of said city include parts like Alexandria and Georgetown
not a big fan of wiki, but they word it pretty well
The
U.S. Constitution provided for a
federal district under the
exclusive jurisdiction of U.S. Congress; the district is therefore not a part of any
U.S. state. The signing of the
Residence Act on July 16, 1790, approved the creation of a
capital district located along the Potomac River near the country's
East Coast. The City of Washington was founded in 1791 to serve as the national capital. The city is divided into
quadrants centered on the
Capitol Building.
In his
Federalist No. 43, published January 23, 1788,
James Madison argued that the new federal government would need authority over a national capital to provide for its own maintenance and safety.
[SIZE=2][16][/SIZE] Five years earlier, a band of unpaid soldiers had besieged Congress while its members were meeting in
Philadelphia. Known as the
Pennsylvania Mutiny of 1783, the event emphasized the need for the national government not to rely on any state for its own security.
[SIZE=2][17][/SIZE]
Article One, Section Eight, of the
Constitution permits the establishment of a "District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States"
----------
key point here
Article One, Section Eight of the United States Constitution grants the
United States Congress "exclusive jurisdiction" over the city. The district did not have an elected local government until the passage of the
1973 Home Rule Act. The Act devolved certain Congressional powers to an
elected mayor and the thirteen-member
Council of the District of Columbia.
However, Congress retains the right to review and overturn laws created by the council and intervene in local affairs
by law..the entire congress is their " Governor "
it (DC) has 435 representatives...they all work there,,..they all should be dedicated to their workplace, they all should (
should) be caring about their home...DC is after all their home at least parttime….
if anything, DC is OVER REPRESENTED (at least on paper, because we all know our congress-critters don't care about dc, or even their own hometown, all they care about if power)
if DC was to become a state... establishing all the bureaucracy that a state requires, they would be the first state to go full bankrupt, and it would happen in the first 5 years of their 'creation', because as a state, they ceded some of the federal bennies
The mayor and council set local taxes and a budget, which must be approved by Congress. The
Government Accountability Office and other analysts have estimated that the city's high percentage of tax-exempt property and the Congressional prohibition of commuter taxes create a structural deficit in the district's local budget of anywhere between $470 million and over $1 billion per year. Congress typically provides additional grants for federal programs such as
Medicaid and the operation of the
local justice system; however, analysts claim that the payments do not fully resolve the imbalance
now if this is all about "Voters rights".... then...
District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment: this option would allow DC residents to vote in Maryland or Virginia for their congressional representatives, with the District of Columbia remaining an independent entity...…..
I see this option as the best, gives those 700k a right to vote, yet still keeps DC as a federal district, no under any one state